Berkeley’s Design Review Committee (DRC) provided comments on the proposed development eight months ago and requested that the applicant “look more carefully” at how the project would work with Telegraph Avenue in general and interface with its adjacent parcels.

“On January 22, 2014, staff again requested that the applicant submit revised drawings to respond to the comments offered by the DRC in June 2013, and requested that these materials be submitted by January 31 to allow time for staff to prepare a staff report to the DRC. To date, the applicant has not presented a revised design to respond to the comments offered by the DRC.”

In addition, multiple requests from Berkeley’s Zoning Adjustments Board staff for additional information needed to evaluate a necessary density bonus for the project as proposed appear to have fallen on deaf ears and the information has yet to be provided.

Four months ago, the parcel’s owner, Ken Sarachan, had agreed to move forward with plans to develop the lot within 45 days or risk forfeiture of the land.

Comments from “Plugged-In” Readers

Once a building’s plan meet code (specified height, setback, window spacing, bay window-age, etc.), how is “design review” even constitutional? Would love to see this denied based solely on “design” and see what a court outside the People’s Republic has to say about public agency “design review”.
[Editor’s Note: As noted above, the plans aren’t code compliant and the project will need a density bonus, in addition to waivers for height, to proceed as proposed.]

I walked by that lot yesterday wondering how this design could fit the relatively small corner lot. Look at the drawing and the storefront next to it, those doorways and windows are half the size of the other buildings. It is virtually a dollhouse.